Not just FB. But overall FF is much faster at loading sites.That is one of the ways that Facebook is causing pain to Apple.
Just speculation on my part, and probably wrong, but that would be a good way for Facebook to hit back at Apple - make Apple's products perform poorly on their sites.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Firefox 86 Gains Total Cookie Protection and Multiple Picture-in-Picture Views
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Anyone who relies on a particular browser or OS feature (e.g. the upcoming iOS 14.5 privacy features) is fooling themselves with a false sense of security. Ad networks don’t need cookies or IDFA to identify you. Facebook and Google can easily identify you today through browser fingerprinting. The browser emits metadata in every http header with your user-agent, screen resolution, plugins, time zone, languages preferences, plugins, etc. These are combined into a hash to uniquely identify you. Even the Do not track flag helps to identify you. Even Brave which has anti fingerprinting features only blocks out the canvas metadata and ad trackers have learned to ignore that attribute if they notice you have Brave. It’s a cat and mouse game and the ad networks are far ahead. You can use all the tracking blockers, and block all cookies (even first party ones) you want, they still know exactly where you’ve been.
The user agent sent by my Firefox to load this page was:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.16; rv:86.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/86.0
This along with window size is not unique enough information for Google to track me across the internet. To do so requires more advanced techniques, like the ones being combated in privacy aware browsers. Other browsers like Chrome are straight-up spyware and phone home with your browsing history by default anyways. If you're really serious about not being tracked by anyone, then use Tor. Choice of browser makes a difference and anti-tracking efforts are a noble pursuit. I certainly do not believe this is an unsolvable problem.
Or Firefox with uMatrix and Facebook Container. Those two addons alone are enough for average users.
Plus, Tor isn't liked at some workplaces precisely due to the anonymity.
Finally after xx years of creating xx Tech, we have this advanced xx feature.....sometimes I wish MR can rank comments so we don't wast time reading this.
In recent experience, MR is more a news aggregator, not big on taking initiatives as it used to. I wonder what's up.
As welcome as developments like this are, it’s difficult to shake the impression that it’s a losing battle against increasingly devious advertisers. They always seem to find a way to thwart anti-tracking measures. Fingerprinting is commonplace now. Even with the Brave browser’s privacy settings maxed out (which breaks some functionality) we’re still not fully protected. Read the other day that favicons are now being used to track people. It never ends. Wish there was a way to just completely blind the sites we visit and block them from accessing any data whatsoever.
Yes, user-agent and resolution are not enough to identify an individual, however fingerprinting takes into account far more than that, for example:
- HTTP_ACCEPT Headers
- Browser Plugin Details
- Time Zone Offset
- Time Zone
- Screen Size and Color Depth
- System Fonts
- Are Cookies Enabled?
- Limited supercookie test
- Hash of canvas fingerprint
- Hash of WebGL fingerprint
- WebGL Vendor & Renderer
- DNT Header Enabled?
- Language
- Platform
- Touch Support
- Ad Blocker Used
- AudioContext fingerprint
- CPU Class
- Hardware Concurrency
- Device Memory (GB)
Great idea.
If you have the latest macOS and all browsers with knowledge of these ... have at this and record your findings
Upload in a specific thread and get featured.
Here it is:
Safari - has some anti-tracking stuff but doesn't really work with adblockers, 5/10
Chrome - is spyware but allows ad blockers, 4/10
FF - og legit homeboy, 10/10
Brave - is adware, spyware, and part of a cryptocurrency pyramid scheme but pretends to be privacy-focused, 0/10
Mozilla is starting to get really sleazy, adding a cookie blocker then playing favourites by whitelisting Google? Thats the biggest criminal and the main cookie we want to take down.
Thanks for pointing this, so much for a feature that will whitelist their favourite (sponsor) sites. Maybe they should whitelist Facebook, Amazon, and 2o7.net . That will make this feature extra useful.
I noticed DDG does this on iOS. I can sign into two separate FB accounts at the same time.
Be nice to do this on the desktop.
You can. In Firefox there is an option called FireFox containers. You can make a "container" for each account on the same site.
Its a mockery, says "evil inside" based on the "intel inside" ad which Mac users replied with "evil inside"
Great idea.
If you have the latest macOS and all browsers with knowledge of these ... have at this and record your findings
No need. Firefox and Brave are best and open source. Safari if you trust Apple that is. Edge and Chrome are spyware.
What you say is false, if not, give proof. Brave is open source for the world to see if it has any privacy breaching code. Their ad program is OFF by DEFAULT and is OPT IN by user's choice.
Here is the Brave source code, if you can point humanity to the privacy breaching code we will all be thankful to you:
Brave Software
We're reinventing the browser as a user-first platform for speed, privacy, better ads, and beyond - Brave Software
github.com
Just because it's open source doesn't mean it's trustworthy. They were editing URLs to include their own referral codes instead of the actual URL the user intended to visit. Nobody noticed until some random Twitter user paid attention: https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/8/21283769/brave-browser-affiliate-links-crypto-privacy-ceo-apologyNo need. Firefox and Brave are best and open source. Safari if you trust Apple that is. Edge and Chrome are spyware.
What you say is false, if not, give proof. Brave is open source for the world to see if it has any privacy breaching code. Their ad program is OFF by DEFAULT and is OPT IN by user's choice.
Here is the Brave source code, if you can point humanity to the privacy breaching code we will all be thankful to you:
Brave Software
We're reinventing the browser as a user-first platform for speed, privacy, better ads, and beyond - Brave Software
They don't do that anymore since they were caught, but now that they've tried it once, no reason to trust them again. They're not a charity. Their entire value proposition is those Basic Attention Coins, and sooner or later they will find ways to ensure it materializes.
Last edited:
MR does rank comments if you aren't in the forum view.
Wow. AudioContext fingerprint is particularly identifying.Yes, user-agent and resolution are not enough to identify an individual, however fingerprinting takes into account far more than that, for example:
You can take this simple test run by the EFF to get a feel for how much your current browser is leaking your Identity even with all the extensions like uBlock, privacy badger, ghostery etc
- HTTP_ACCEPT Headers
- Browser Plugin Details
- Time Zone Offset
- Time Zone
- Screen Size and Color Depth
- System Fonts
- Are Cookies Enabled?
- Limited supercookie test
- Hash of canvas fingerprint
- Hash of WebGL fingerprint
- WebGL Vendor & Renderer
- DNT Header Enabled?
- Language
- Platform
- Touch Support
- Ad Blocker Used
- AudioContext fingerprint
- CPU Class
- Hardware Concurrency
- Device Memory (GB)
The information you would find out from these would be effectively the same as already provided by the user-agent: I use Firefox 86 on an Intel Mac. Computer make and model ≠ personally identifiable information. It is still not enough to uniquely identify you across the internet, and combating it is not a lost cause.Yes, user-agent and resolution are not enough to identify an individual, however fingerprinting takes into account far more than that, for example:
You can take this simple test run by the EFF to get a feel for how much your current browser is leaking your Identity even with all the extensions like uBlock, privacy badger, ghostery etc
- HTTP_ACCEPT Headers
- Browser Plugin Details
- Time Zone Offset
- Time Zone
- Screen Size and Color Depth
- System Fonts
- Are Cookies Enabled?
- Limited supercookie test
- Hash of canvas fingerprint
- Hash of WebGL fingerprint
- WebGL Vendor & Renderer
- DNT Header Enabled?
- Language
- Platform
- Touch Support
- Ad Blocker Used
- AudioContext fingerprint
- CPU Class
- Hardware Concurrency
- Device Memory (GB)
Really? With my configuration one in 6.46 browsers have the same value.
Last edited:
I can no longer copy-paste screen shots into this forum via FF 86.0. Tried starting in safe mode with all extensions disabled; that didn't work. Set security to standard - didn't work either. I can still take a screen shot (let's say of Apple Profiler) and copy-paste directly into a reply box using Edge or Safari. But for whatever reason, at least on my machine, it no longer works.
Edit: a refresh fixed it.
Edit: a refresh fixed it.
Last edited:
That was for ads, totally blown out of proportion. Google literally spies on you and people still used Gmail, Chrome, Google, YouTube, and Maps. That mis step didn't not breach privacy, what I understand of it is that they just put their ad instead of another.
If you are going to be that picky then Ubuntu too put in Amazon links or trackers some years back, and Firefox actually still collects telemetry and put Google as your default browser.
No, it needs to be blown to actual proportion. It's not a misstep; it was deliberate, and they thought they could get away with it. It's not about the privacy, it's about the trust.
At least Canonical was open about it, but yeah, I'm not a fan of that move either. Firefox's telemetry is annoying but minimal and again well-disclosed, and Google default, idc. There's a search engine setting for a reason.
That's pretty bad. I wouldn't trust Brave after that. Firefox only collects telemetry if you opt-in. They also encrypt your synced data before collecting so it's not shadily analyzing your browsing history, bookmarks, and address book in order to serve ads.